Date: Sun, 23 Apr 1995 16:54:00 -0700 (PDT) From: Julian Elischer <julian@ref.tfs.com> To: jhay@mikom.csir.co.za (John Hay) Cc: hackers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: syscons probe function Message-ID: <199504232354.QAA28367@ref.tfs.com> In-Reply-To: <199504232133.XAA01284@zibbi.mikom.csir.co.za> from "John Hay" at Apr 23, 95 11:33:12 pm
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > I have mailed about this 2 weeks ago but received no response, so I'm trying > again:) sorry to hear this... sometime everyone assumes that someone else is going to answer.. basically if you haven't heard in 2 days, assume this has happenned. (we are planning on fixing this when we work out HOW) :) > > The changes to syscons.c in the last month or so panic my machines that do > not have a screen but have syscons in the kernel (they only have a serial > terminal). It happens somewhere in the attach routine during a bcopy. > > This led me to look through the the syscons.c file. One thing that bothers me > is that the probe can never fail. It assumes that there is a screen. In the > attach routine it will check if it is a colour screen otherwise it reverts > to monochrome. > > Shouldn't the probe determine if there is a screen and fail if there isn't? > With the other changes in the kernel and the boot blocks one would assume > that you can have a kernel with syscons compiled in and the syscons probe > will just fail and go on with your console on the serial port, which does > happen by the way, I do see the panic message on the serial terminal. I wonder HOW we could see it there is a display? do a memory test on it's ram? maybe the serial console code should disable syscons? julian
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199504232354.QAA28367>